The Prime Minister's Office tried to cut funding of a registered intervenor in the Enbridge Pipeline Review, calling ForestEthics Canada an, "Enemy of the Government of Canada" and an, "Enemy of the People of Canada", according to a press release by whistleblower Andrew Frank, former Senior Communications Manager with ForestEthics Canada.

How far will the Canadian government go to silence its own citizens, worried about what a massive new pipeline that runs through the country? Apparently, pretty far.

According to the press release, an affidavit alleges the Prime Minister's Office has made an attempt to influence the charitable funding of ForestEthics Canada, a registered intervenor in the National Energy Board's federal review process for the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline.

According to the affidavit, the Prime Minister's Office has informed Tides Canada CEO, Ross McMillan, that it considers ForestEthics to be an "Enemy of the Government of Canada", and an "Enemy of the people of Canada", and that unless Tides Canada alters its charitable support of ForestEthics, there will be consequences.

"Canadian citizens will be shocked to learn that their own government is labelling critics of the Enbridge oil tanker/pipeline project, 'Enemies of the Government of Canada'," says Mr. Frank. "When a government starts labelling its own citizens 'enemies', it has lost its moral authority to govern."

Frank adds, "If the Prime Minister's Office is working behind the scenes to silence voices of opposition and legitimate criticism, how can Canadians have any confidence in this review process? Canadians should be deeply concerned about this information, and I invite those named in my affidavit to sign sworn affidavits attesting to whether or not this is the truth."

In updated news, environmental groups, First Nations and B.C.'s Opposition New Democrats have come out firmly against the $5.5-billion Enbridge plan to pipe Alberta oil to north coast B.C. and ship the oil to Asia on supertankers.

According to the Edmonton Journal, "The Liberals issued a provincewide renewal invitation from Premier Christy Clark on Thursday, asking for input to develop new ideas and policies in advance of the May 2013 election.

The pipeline wasn't among the topics on the table for discussion.

Clark's invitation highlights education, skills and training, mental health and addiction, public and private wages, open government, the Senate and changing the party name as key areas up for discussion at the party's convention this coming fall.

This week, Clark said she won't play politics with the pipeline approval process.

She said she wants to get more environmental and development facts before her government decides whether or not to commit the province's support."

Canada wanted the U.S. to build the pipeline on its soil, risking environmental danger, but when it comes to Canada building on its own land to ship its own oil, it certainly appears much more cautious. Does this change your opinion on the proposed Keystone XL pipeline?

I recall Obama stating in one of his early presidential speeches that he wanted to improve relations with our neighbors to the north in order for the US to obtain the benefits of the oil sands. I'm not so sure we want the tar sands - read up on it, it's not all good.

I call them eco terrorists and thankfully we have a leader that doesn't let eco nazi organizations ruin our country. These are as far left as you can go orgs and I hate everyone associated with them. I wish they would all get a fatal disease and die in excruciating pain.

Gee sounds just the opposite of what is happening here. The head man here is against it. I meand it will only create short term jobs, increase in refining in the Gulf, and our exports. We certainly don't want any of that.

The people need to have a voice in this. They could put it on a ballot for those provinces that will actually have the physical pipeline. This would be like the US deciding to flood the grand canyon and pipe the water to Texas for irrigation. The only difference is that if a water pipeline leaks, there isn't an ecological disaster. And if the people of Arizona didn't have a voice in the matter, they would be upset too.

We are being told that we need to seek other forms of energy like hybrids, solar, and wind so we can lower or eliminate our dependence on oil. If that is the case, then why build a pipeline that will be abandoned in 20 years.